Standards-Based Grading: An Equitable Approach to Assessment

Equitable assessment practices measure students’ performance by using methods that are most appropriate to the individual learner. Standards-based grading is an excellent example of an equitable assessment practice, one that reflects a student-centered pedagogy.

At Utica College, Xiao Xiao, Professor of Mathematics, uses and advocates for standards-based grading. He notes that students learn material at different paces. Traditional grading practices measure whether students have learned the required material within a specified amount of time (e.g. by the end of every week, by the end of every month, and then by the end of the semester). In contrast, standards-based grading focuses on measuring whether students have learned the material by the end of the semester while giving frequent feedback along the way. It helps level the playing field for slow learners and encourages deeper learning for everyone.

Standards-based grading requires the instructor to articulate clearly the precise learning objectives addressed in the course.  Students are informed on a weekly basis what learning objectives will be covered and assessed in the course. If a student does not do well on a specific assessment, the instructor provides feedback on his/her/their performance, directs the student to additional resources related to the material, and then gives further assessment opportunities for students to achieve the related learning objective(s). By making each assessment low stakes, students are not punished if they need more time to learn the material.  

Xiao notes that mistakes are valuable to learning. He states, “Mistakes should be expected when a person is learning something new. Traditional grading punishes students for making those mistakes that are part of the learning process, especially when students don’t learn fast enough.”

He further maintains that using standards-based grading in a course enhances student success. Since the precise learning objectives are clearly articulated, students know exactly what they are expected to learn. This approach works especially well in courses where student backgrounds and levels of academic preparation vary.

Xiao additionally notes that standards-based grading may have the added benefit of minimizing academic dishonesty in the virtual learning environment. He explains, “Students are given frequent low-stake quizzes and, if needed, future assessment opportunities to demonstrate their learning. They are provided with ongoing feedback to promote their learning. There are no monthly big exams that might invite cheating.”

While Xiao believes that standards-based grading is less work than traditional grading because instructors no longer have to spend time considering partial credit, he says preparing a course where standards-based grading is used takes a significant amount of time.

“If someone wants to use standards-based grading, I recommend prepping a month or two in advance.”

Xiao concludes that standards-based grading forces him to think hard about what he really wants students to learn in his classes and what he considers less important for them to know. “It helps instructors to clarify what kind of learning students should achieve,” he says.

And without question, that is good pedagogy and good assessment.